No Sleep 'Til Christmas (2018)

Director: Phil Traill
Writer(s): Steve Smith and Traill
Starring: Odette Annable, Dave Annable, Charles Michael Davis and Alphonso McAuley

It’s amazing how far chemistry can take even the cheesiest of rom-coms. Take, for example, No Sleep Till Christmas, a movie that - even within the confines of the corny holiday romance subgenre - sounds even dumber than most. And yet, somehow, against the odds, it works, due almost entirely to the chemistry between the two stars.

Lizzie (Odette Annable) is engaged to Josh (“The Vampire Diaries” Charles Michael Davis), who she thinks is the love of her life. She is an event planner and he is a doctor, but while their careers are on opposite ends of the spectrum, they both connect in their mutual need for organization in their lives. 

There is one little problem though: she can’t sleep with Josh. No, not like that: She literally cannot sleep next to him. Like, at all. While he’s out like a light, she’s either tossing and turning next to him, or staring off into space; she’s lucky to get an hour a night. Nevermind the fact that such little sleep over a long period of time would not only be a serious medical issue that would quickly lead to hallucinations and, eventually, death (look up fatal familial insomnia and prepare to have your mind blown); here, it only causes minor discomfort and a lack of focus at her job.

One night, she is out driving when she runs over a pedestrian. This is Billy, a man who’s completely the opposite of her: He works at a bar - a sign in these movies that he has no aim or career aspirations - is messy, and takes life as it comes, rather than planning it all out in advance. The only thing he shares with Lizzie is a similar case of insomnia; he can't sleep next to anyone, including his ex Nicola. 

She drives him to a hospital and, for reasons that don’t quite make a lick of sense, the two decide to rest before heading inside to get him the treatment he may very well need. Well, wouldn’t you know it that the two both wake the next morning, several hours later, refreshed and rejuvenated after a long night’s sleep. (In the case of Billy, it’s probably just due to a concussion and/or massive internal injuries.)

Lizzie thinks she’s cured of her problem, but after several more sleepless nights next to her future husband, realizes that the situation goes much deeper: She can only sleep next to Billy. Well, we don’t know this for sure, because she doesn’t even try to sleep next to anyone else; for all we know, she may be able to sleep with everyone except Josh. At any rate, she makes Billy an awkward proposition: She will pay him to sleep next to her. It’s a bizarre offer that he initially refuses, until he realizes that he can use that money to help fund a bar he’s always dreamed of opening (wow, who knew that even bartenders could have dreams). 

At first, the duo sleep together in their car, much like they did that first night. But soon, they decide to go a little more upscale, meeting together for a couple hours at a time inside a hotel. Because that’s not going to raise any eyebrows in the completely guaranteed event that Josh eventually discovers her secret double life. 

The plot progresses more or less as you’d expect, and while it doesn’t really stray away from the tried-and-true formula, it gets an insane amount of mileage out of its likable cast. The two leads (who are married in real life) feed off of each other well, delivering some humorous banter (and a knack for comedic timing) that hits the funny bone. The rest of the cast is also capable, including Charles Michael Davis, although he is given the thankless task of being a serious, uptight character in a rom-com. (He does have a scene that surprisingly has some emotional resonance late in the movie, which hits a little bit harder given the otherwise lighthearted atmosphere.)

I suppose more traditional fans of this kind of schlock might be off-put by the storyline, as Lizzie really has no reason to leave Josh. He’s not the typical douchebag you find in these movies, where you’re essentially cheering for them to find someone else; his only “crime” is being too similar to her. Similarly, this is basically a Christmas movie in name and setting only. Those expecting some holiday cheer and scenes adorned with tinsel and Christmas trees will find this to be sorely lacking; it just happens to take place around Christmastime.

But at the same time, it delivers a message that some other holiday cheesefests completely avoid: That no matter what you have, it can always be better. Well, I don’t know if that’s the message, because that sounds rather dark…the point is, life's too short to settle for someone - or something - you're not into. It's not exactly deep, but it goes deeper than you'd expect from a movie about two people who can only fall asleep next to each other.

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 8/10

TRAILER

Rich in Love (aka Ricos de Amor) (2020)

Director: Bruno Garotti 
Writer(s): Garotti and Sylvio Goncalves
Starring: Danilo Mesquita, Giovanna Lancelloti, Jaffar Bambirra and Lelle

Rich in Love is yet another Hallmark-style love story about the womanizing son of a rich tomato tycoon (?) named Teto, who rides on the coattails of this father’s success. He doesn’t seem to do anything except sleep around with random women, and drive fancy cars about the town. But who can really fault him, because he doesn’t have to do anything else. Like most all rich kids, his life is laid out before him, a fate that was already decided even before he was born: He is going to inherit “The Tomato King’s” entire empire. 

Then he meets Paula, a driven medical student with big dreams and aspirations. Teto immediately falls for her, but is faced with a dilemma: How can he be sure that Paula loves him for him and not just for his wealth? So he does what anyone would do in this situation: He pretends to be poor. Oh, and at the same time he begs his father not to simply leave him his company because he is blood, but because he actually thinks he’s the best one for the job. He’s sick of living life like an entitled brat and wants to clean up his act.

At the same time he’s pretending to be poor, he’s also pretending to be someone else to actually earn his father’s assistant position. He trades places with Igor, his friend (and father’s lawn worker), and sees the results of his privilege firsthand as the executives of his father’s company flock to him - thinking he’s Teto - while ignoring the real Tito.

One ridiculous plot device follows another: Teto turns to his father’s former assistant, Monique, to give him tips on how to get the job; he tries to be in two places at once during an important meeting, with painfully obvious results; and his two lives eventually crash together, leading to the obligatory fight between the movie’s two lovebirds. 

The line between “completely formulaic” and “original” doesn’t really exist in these movies: Add even a shred of believability and all the magic is gone. They’re supposed to be uplifting fairy tales where the good guys always fall in love, and absolutely nothing is grounded in reality. And sure enough, people looking for that type of tale - where the two main stars get together and (based on insinuation) have a happy lifetime together - won’t be disappointed. But Rich in Love does at least toggle with the formula somewhat, leading to some unexpected fates for some of its supporting characters that are at least slightly unexpected.

One such example: There isn’t a villain. At least, not in the traditional sense. Paula does have a sleazeball doctor who’s clearly interested in her (and in whom the feeling is clearly not reciprocated), but his character is relegated to the background more often than not, and aside from being an annoyance, never really factors into the story enough to even be considered a real threat. 

I have only seen one other sappy foreign rom-com, and one unifying theme is that they seem to nail the casting. I’ve mentioned it many times before (and I will mention it again for new readers to this blog), but the attractiveness of a movie’s cast is one factor that decides whether or not we’ll even watch it. It sounds shallow - and it is - but there’s just too little actual substance to these characters to be anything more than a pretty face. So when they don’t even have that, there’s really not much of a point in watching. (Or, even worse, you’ll have a good-looking man or woman opposite a not-so-attractive one, which is frustrating in its own right.)

Rich in Love not only features two good-looking leads, but they also seem to have a lot of chemistry together. I say “seem” because we did see the dubbed version on Netflix, which loses some of their performances in translation (literally and figuratively), but you can still tell they work well together, and their relationship is cute and (mostly) believable, as far as this cheese goes.

This one isn’t holiday-themed, but who cares? It’s still the type of movie people love to watch around the holidays. And really, the only difference between these and “regular” rom-coms are a few well-placed Christmas trees and tinsel in the background. This one might be even more ridiculous than most, but it’s self-aware and never takes itself too seriously. That, as well as the solid cast (and decent dubbing), are enough to elevate this well above average fare in this tired subgenre.

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 7.5/10

TRAILER

Dangerous Lies (2020)

Director: Michael M. Scott
Writer(s): David Golden
Starring: Camila Mendes, Jessie T. Usher, Sasha Alexander and Elliott Gould

If there was one place I honestly didn’t expect Netflix to go, it was in the direction of Lifetime movies. I guess I didn’t expect them to get all Hallmark-y, either, but I guess that makes a little more sense: Everyone’s looking for a little holiday cheer come Christmastime, and who better to provide it than the world’s most popular streaming service?

But how can you explain their voluntarily willingness to create complete garbage? Okay, maybe it’s slightly “higher-end” than some of the stuff MarVista pumps, featuring semi-famous actors and higher production costs, but at the end of the day, it’s really all for nothing. Here we have their attempt at a Lifetime “thriller” that even comes complete with a bland, broadly descriptive title.

Admittedly, this one has a decent plot that takes some time to fully unfold: Katie and Adam are a couple struggling to make ends meet, which seems very authentic considering Camila Mendes, who plays her, stars in “Riverdale” a rather popular show on CW. I’m sure she’s struggling. Anyway, Katie constantly stresses over their financial situation, while Adam seems rather laid-back about it.

Then, Katie gets a job caring for Leonard, an elderly man who lives alone with no family or friends. The two hit it off and get along so well, that Leonard even offers her some money when she lets slip that her and her man are struggling financially. She is reluctant, but eventually turns him down. That doesn’t stop a $7,000 check from showing up; once again, the two are hesitant about what to do with it, but eventually agree to cash it.

Then, Leonard dies somewhat suddenly. While randomly going through his things, they stumble on an old storage chest, which has all of his life’s greatest memories. But, hidden in a compartment underneath that, are several large bills. (Well, the bills themselves are normal size, but the amounts on the bills are pretty high.) Totalling close to $100,000. Once again, they are confused about how to go about it, but figure if they let it go, it will just end up in a police station somewhere, so they opt to take it.

At least, that’s how they make it seem…yet a couple days later, Adam goes back to the house to retrieve the money, and gets smacked in the head by someone who’s apparently after it himself. Wait…if the police were there, don’t you think they would have searched the chest that was mere feet away from the deceased? I guess not.

Anyway, the hard-luck couple learn that, in his will, Leonard left everything to Katie. Now all of a sudden their theft of that money doesn’t seem all that illegal! However, all of their past actions - most of them innocent - come back to haunt them as a hard-nosed woman named Detective Chesler attempts to get to the bottom of the mysterious death. Things get even more grim for our lovable duo when another body turns up…it would seem as if Katie just happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, every single time. Is there something she’s keeping from us, the viewer? Or are there outside forces beyond her control dictating the couple’s fate?

Oh yeah, and true to form for these movies, there are a few subplots going on at the same time to keep us on our toes: A handsome man named Mickey Hayden keeps popping by on random days in an attempt to buy the house from Katie. The more he gets denied, the more he seems to follow them around. And then there’s the additional body that turns up in Leonard’s home…who seemed to be holding a pouch of diamonds. Who’s in on the plot to undo Katie? And how far are they willing to go to accomplish that goal?

This is a pretty typical example of a B-grade thriller with an excessively ridiculous plot, most of which escalates because of poor communication: There are several points where Katie and Adam are under suspicion, but don’t even try to explain the truth, making things appear way worse than they ought to. The twists and turns are also pretty generic, feeling tacked-on and without much conviction. 

The cast is alright, but they don’t stand a chance against a poor script and equally disappointing execution. It’s really a completely average attempt at a thriller, without much in the way of thrills or intensity. Even sadder: There really aren't many inadvertent moments of laughter, which I guess is giving the filmmakers' credit for not being totally incompetent. The issue is, that just makes it even more boring. 

If you like your mysteries lukewarm and largely ineffective, Dangerous Lies would be a great way to kill a winter’s night. 

ENTERTAINMENT RATING: 5/10

TRAILER

Oxygen (2021)

Director: Alexandre Aja
Writer(s): Christie LeBlanc
Starring: Melanie Laurent, Mathieu Amalric, Malik Zidi and Laura Boujenah

A woman wakes up in a tiny chamber with no recollection of who she is or how she got there in Alexander Aja’s Oxygen, which is a complete 180 from his previous effort, the embarrassingly overrated alligator-attack-during-storm movie, Crawl. 

This one is centered around what could be considered a gimmick: it takes place almost entirely in one setting, with one visible actor (in this case, Melanie Laurent), who wakes up in a confined cryogenic chamber and discovers she has 90 minutes before she runs out of the titular necessity. As if that weren't enough, she also has no idea who she is or how she ended up there. If that sounds like it will be boring to you, it might very well be: there’s really no action to speak of, and it’s definitely not the type of movie that will appeal to fans of blood-soaked action, or those who like their films to have a frenetic pace. 

Now, having literally one actress, in one setting, with no dialogue, would get dull for even the most patient of cinephiles; thankfully, Elizabeth Hansen - the name of our solo protagonist - has one ally in the form of MILO, an advanced AI computer system. Basically Siri on steroids, Liz can use MILO to call people she knows, ask him questions about her past, view her social media accounts, and even to access information about the strange box she finds herself in.

Unsurprisingly, Liz isn’t just content with waiting for her impending doom, so she kills time by looking for a way out, while simultaneously piecing together the story of how she got there in the first place. Little by little, we learn revelations about her as a person, and what led her (or someone else…) to choose this fate for her. Was she a bad person sentenced to die by asphyxiation? A woman who was just in the wrong place at the wrong time? The twists and turns come at a relaxed pace, and don’t really do much to ratchet up the tension, but they’re close enough together to prevent things from getting too boring.

It all plays out like a futuristic version of Buried, that Ryan Reynolds movie that found him buried alive in a coffin with very little oxygen. Whereas that film used close, in-tight shots to maximize the feeling of claustrophobia, Oxygen is shot in such a way that some of the intensity is lost. The room usually feels too wide and open and most shots, it's not until the main character attempts to move that you really see how tight the chamber is, but considering she isn’t mobile very often, it mostly looks a lot bigger than it should. (As a second opinion, my wife is terribly claustrophobic - to the extent she can't ride elevators - and she had no problems making it through this movie.)

Also eliminating some potential for terror: MILO. While he is a computer incapable of human emotions, he is too advanced for the story. I guess it was a necessity to have in order to move the story along, but a lot of it feels like a copout, considering he knows how to do virtually everything Liz requests. 

All of it leads to a rather unsatisfying, ambiguous ending that really didn’t feel all that natural to me. The actual meaning of that final shot - the only one that doesn’t take place in the small pod - is up for grabs, with even the director stating that he doesn’t know exactly what to make of it. While I don’t mind endings like that, other people who like closure or their stories to have a resolution, will probably be frustrated with this one. Especially those who get caught up in the story.

I guess looking back, Oxygen isn’t a horror movie at all, but rather a sci-fi/drama mix. It isn’t interested in exploiting the claustrophobic setting, which also makes one wonder why they even centered the story around it in the first place. But what it lacks in tension, it makes up for in dramatics, with a story that frequently attempts to tug on the heartstrings, rather than increasing the viewer's heart rate. One could certainly be forgiven - and let down - for assuming the contrary, with director Alexandre Aja having made a name for himself within the horror genre, with efforts like High Tension, and the aforementioned Crawl. 

The film’s biggest strength is Melanie Laurent, as Elizabeth Hansen. She imbues her character with vulnerability, and covers a wide range of expressions and a frequent shifting of mindsets with seemingly relative ease. Thanks to her, the story comes off as believable - and interesting - when it just as easily could have been an absolute failure. 

If you’re into slow-burn movies, Oxygen might give you something to like. It’s a minimalist film that makes decent use of a single, tight setting, and an excellent performance from Melanie Laurent. But if you aren't interested in character stories or talking, then you should probably give this one a pass. 

RATING: 5.5/10.

TRAILER

Night Teeth (2021)

Director: Adam Randall
Writer(s): Brent Dillon
Starring: Jorge Lendeborg Jr., Debby Ryan, Lucy Fry and Raul Castillo

Boy, Debby Ryan must really be desperate to shed her former Disney-star image: First, she starred in the TV-MA rated TV series “Insatiable” as a wannabe beauty pageant contestant who’s taken under the wing of a former lawyer-turned-pageant-coach. Sure, the series was more on the comedic side, but there was certainly more raunchiness than one would expect out of a former child/teen star.

Also one who might still feel in need of an image-shedding is Lucy Fry, who got her start in shows like “Alien Surf Girls” and the endearingly awful “Mako Mermaids” before moving on to more adult fare like “Wolf Creek”. Still, it would be believable that a child who entered the limelight at a young age might feel as though that shadow is following them around, ready to pigeonhole or sideline them at any time. It's no wonder many end up trying to shed that "goody two shoes" image.

Well, the two have teamed up as vampires in the Netflix-original Night Teeth, which actually bares the slightly less-adult TV-14 rating. But don’t let that rating fool you: while there’s barely any blood, and no real sexual situations to speak of, there’s a lot of adult language, which singlehandedly should have been enough to push it into TV-MA territory. Can they help pull this Netflix-produced film up from the realm of mediocrity? 

Benny is a wannabe music producer who lives at home with his grandma. He seems to have big dreams, but without the motivation to follow up on them (I know his plight all too well). His older brother, Jay, stops home for a visit; he runs what appears to be an Uber-style business, offering rides to upscale clients. One of his workers has called in sick, putting a scheduled ride in jeopardy. Benny offers to fill the role. At first, his brother is hesitant, but eventually relents.

His task appears to be simple: drive two girls around for an entire night. Jay lays out the ground rules: don’t talk to them, leave them alone, and then collect what should be a big tip at the end. It sounds easy enough, but as we know from watching one too many horror movies, it can never be that simple. As it turns out, the two girls are Blaire and Zoe (Ryan and Fry, respectively), two girls who request Benny to drive them to a series of parties. All he has to do is wait in the car for them, and drive on to the next one. Still sounds pretty easy, right? Well, of course it doesn’t quite go down that way - especially not after he learns his two ride companions are vampires looking to overthrow an evil leader, and Benny’s own brother is a vampire hunter who wants to exterminate them all.

Night Teeth is competently made, which of course is to be expected given that it’s a Netflix production. It has plenty of style, a likable cast, and is imbued with a generous helping of humor, most of which actually manages to be more funny than annoying. The problem is that it’s enveloped in such an unengaging story that somehow manages to be both too basic, and too complex, for its own good. In other words, there’s a pretty straightforward path from point A to point B, but it takes the scenic route, throwing in unnecessary characters and plot twists until it almost becomes confusing. 

Of course, confusing plots can be a plus, but not in the type of movie where it’s all clearly just supposed to be mindless fun. And, it's not good in a movie with so little payoff besides the happy ending that we could all see coming from a mile away (mild spoiler alert, I guess, but you can't say you didn't already expect it).

Then there’s all the obligatory plot devices: the romance that blooms between Blaire and Benny; the showdown with the final boss; the random inclusion of Megan Fox in a teeny, pointless role; it all plays out in completely predictable fashion over the course of its bloated 107 minutes. 

Aside from the cast, and the stylish visuals, there’s really not much here to recommend; it’s especially not worth sitting down and completely investing your time in it. But if you’re just looking for a Halloween movie to throw on while you carve pumpkins, or bake Halloween cookies - something you can just pop in and check on from time-to-time - then this is as good a background movie as you’re going to find. You might get a little confused by the plot, but trust me: you’re not missing anything.

RATING: 5/10

TRAILER

MARVEL-LESS MARVISTA: Nanny Cam (2014)

Director: Nancy Leopardi
Writer(s): Brian McAuley
Starring: India Eisley, Laura Allen, Cam Gigandet, and Farrah McKenzie

It's been said, I'm sure somewhere, that the opening shot is the one chance you have to suck in your audience, and to give them an enticing taste of what's to come. The opening scene of Nanny Cam does a perfect job of that, by essentially showing you all the film's flaws right from the outset: Linda and Mark, the main couple of this mess, leave their 8-year-old daughter Chloe—who's a terrible actress, by the way-- with an elderly woman—also a terrible actress-- while they plan to have a romantic evening out together. As it turns out, the old biddy has dementia (c'mon Linda, you should have done a little more research!), and ends up dropping a pot of burning water on Chloe. At least, I think that's what happens...she never shows any signs of actual injury and never gets taken to a hospital, but it's made out to be a big deal, with Linda informing the old woman she can't watch Chloe anymore.

Well now what can the upper-middle-class couple do when they want to go somewhere, as apparently no one in these movies have any friends or family? The search for a replacement is about to begin when lo and behold, an option falls right into their laps! Enter Heather (India Eisley), a creepy teenager who happens to wander onto the property in time to prevent disaster; Chloe has found Mark's nailgun, which was conveniently placed out in the open and within reach of a curious 8-year-old. Just based on this random encounter, Mark thinks she'd be perfect for the job, but Linda is reluctant—after all, they did just get burned (pun intended) by not properly researching the last babysitter—so she goes the extra mile to really make sure Heather is who she says she is: by calling the one reference on her resume. When the reference checks out (and it should, since it's Heather herself, not even disguising her voice), the two stop the search immediately, having found the perfect replacement! (Now we're starting to see how they ended up with a dementia-addled oldie).

But things aren't right with the new nanny, something Linda discovers not from all the red flags we've seen up to this point, but after watching video footage in which Heather talks to Chloe for three straight hours. “What could an 18-year-old and an 8-year-old possibly have to talk about for three hours?” she wonders aloud, and becomes obsessed with finding out, hitting up the local electronics store clerk and asking him about in-depth set-ups, an area he's creepily adept at.

Soon, Chloe starts acting strangely toward her mother, as if she wants Heather to be her new mommy, and Heather really starts clamping down on Mark. Will boring ol' Linda pull her family back away from the bizarre clutches of evil? Or will Heather get rid of her competition so that she can have the family she so desperately craves?

This one is worse than most MarVista productions, with terrible acting, consistently awful dialogue, and infuriatingly-illogical plot twists. I know, I know, those are the qualities you're actually looking for in a Lifetime movie, but there's a fine line between a “bad-good” movie, and a “bad-bad” movie, and this one typically entrenches itself in the latter category, with an almost exhausting number of inconsistencies and stupid moments that it would be virtually impossible to remember them all.

Its one “saving grace”- in this case meant as the sole thing that saves it from an even lower score—is Heather's backstory, which is legitimately devastating. Usually Lifetime movies seem to skirt away from truly disturbing material, but her origins add a slight layer of complexity, and empathy, missing from many Lifetime villains. And while her motives still end up being hilariously basic and laughable, it still helps to understand why she acts the way she does, rather than just having her be some one-dimensional caricature. On the downside, the sudden burst of seriousness does underscore some of the (unintentional) goofy fun, by injecting a real underscore of sadness, though it's still so bad that the laughs resume shortly after the shock wears off.

If you're a purveyor of trashy made-for-TV movies, Nanny Cam might have what you're looking for, but for me, I learned the hard way that too much of a bad thing can be...well, just bad.

RATING: 3/10

TRAILER